Boil Times/Intensity Question and Observation

[dinokath]

Hi all,

Been brewing beer for a while and have started doing something in the last couple years after hearing a Jamil podcast. It was all about thermal load and shelf stability. I used to just boil the crap out of the beer, full flame, sounded like a jet engine running while I did it. I have a keggle and brew pretty much just 5 gallon batches. I'd have boil overs like crazy if I wasn't paying attention.

Fast forward a few years and I hear Jamil talking about thermal load and not cranking up the heat so that your beer lasts more than a few months. Something about denaturing proteins and whatnot. At the time, I was sipping on what was the best stout I had made to date and reflecting on how it was just a year old and didn't quite taste as good as it was when first bottled and within the first six months. I was intrigued and was ramping up to brew up another variation on that stout but this time using a used barrel to age it. I decided to go low and slow on the boil and see how it did. I did and the boil time was just under 2 hours. Fermented it. Aged it in the barrel, pulled it when it tasted just right, bottled 1/2, kegged the other half. It was delicious.

Fast forward to last night. I pull one of those beers out that has been sitting inside the house, in the dark, in my aging cellar (it's really a closet, but it makes me feel fancy). Chill it ever so slightly, crack it open, and OMG, it's even better than I remember. It was brewed last year in April.

So basically, for the last year or so, I stopped worrying about boil time and focused more on hitting a gravity point for my intended style. I use Beersmith 2 for all my calculations and pretty much hit my targets 100% of the time, which is easy when you boil for gravity!! I've used this method for everything from Munich helles to schwarzbier to DIPA to stouts to everything I have brewed in the last year and a half. It's working pretty good for me but I was just wondering how many more people just might be doing this. Are there any disadvantages? I know I could potentially over caramelize the wort or scorch it, but when cleaning up, other than when I brew a crazy dark heavy beer, I am not seeing anything like that on the kettle.

I don't enter my beer in competitions so it hasn't been formally judged and I am simply a guy who likes to brew beer just to do it. Lately I've picked up beers that are a quintessential examples of the beer I am brewing and have buddies do blind taste tests, extremely unscientific methods being employed, but I just want to see how they stack up and if they taste right. They do and in most cases I get the nod over the commercial example, I suspect more due to freshness since I really like the German beers and make those more than anything else really, so my example beers could be worn out from the journey, so to speak.

Any feedback is appreciated! Thanks!

 

[Smellyglove]

I have experimented a lot lately with boil intensity and evaporation rate. The evaporation rate is more due to that I'm using and induction plate and if I set it to 4, I get slightly less boil than I want, so I use the lid to up the boil. But at setting 5 it was to much boil for my tests.

Anyway. Boil intensity does a lot, and time.

My best example is a RIS I brew at least two times a year. I've been boiling it for up to 5-6 hours, and its thick. Some judges misinterpreted it as bein under-attenuated, because it's so thick and sweet-ish. It has never underattenuated. When I brew it 60 minutes boil it's a whole different beer in the mouthfeel-department. It's more easy drinking, light in the mouth.

What is more correct is up to me/you. But I know that hard boils and longer boils does also affect the color. So A light drinking Helles I would just boil as short as possible. The oxygen pickup during a strong boil is more strong comparing to a soft boil, and the beer darkens, the maillard reactions does also make the beer darker, so it darkens because of two factors.

Imo the boil is an often overlooked stage in brewing. Doing it right for the style does make an impact.

And, for a hefe it's said that you need to keep the boil so that some of the proteins doesn't coagulate and drop out, as it will affect mouthfeel. I've tried this atleast a handful of times, while retaining more of the wheat-feeling, I'm not sure on the mouthfeel. Maillard-reactions does bump the mouthfeel, as does proteins in solution, but I feel the maillard-effect wins over the proteins when it comes to mouthfeel.

Also, a hard boil does affect the total fermentability of the wort slightly due to maiilard, you get a lower fermentable wort.

 

[mabrungard]

I just presented on the subject of wort boiling at the Portland AHA conference and spent over 6 months researching this subject. The short answer is that we homebrewers are still stuck on where the Pro's were 40 years ago. Back then, the state of the art was to boil vigorously. Since then, the Pro's have learned more about what is needed to rid wort of DMS and that there are downsides to exposing the wort to too much thermal stress.

If you brew with the palest malts (aka: Pils), then you first have to worry about converting the DMS precursor (SMM) to DMS. Depending upon the elevation at which you are brewing at, you're probably going to need to spend at least a half hour at your local boiling point but with NO VIGOR. That means that you can just have a minimal simmer and have the kettle completely covered. The SMM to DMS conversion rate is directly proportional to the boiling temperature, so high elevation brewers might have to simmer for longer than a half hour when brewing with high percentage of Pils malt. Because the kettle is covered, the heat input can be turned way down. The lower heating reduces the creation of Thiobarbituric Acid (TBA) which is what has been found to prematurely stale beers.

If you're brewing with slightly darker kilned base malt (2.5L to 4L), then a lot of the SMM has already been converted into DMS during the kilning process and you don't have to worry so much about performing the simmer. However, there is still DMS and that has to be expelled.

It turns out that it doesn't take much to get DMS out of wort. A modest, open boil with about a half hour duration is sufficient. The brewer's elevation doesn't affect the DMS volatilization rate. The most important feature of this stage of the boil is that there is good wort circulation in the kettle and there is good exchange with the atmosphere. Some pro systems don't really boil their wort at this stage. They might use pumped wort recirculation and a spray nozzle to get the wort in more frequent contact with the atmosphere in order to give DMS the chance to exit the wort. The point is that you don't have to have a volcano in your kettle and you don't have to boil for a long time to produce very good DMS reduction.

I've been using this simmer/open boil technique for over a year now and have made several beers with high pils malt content and I and other National and Master judges cannot detect DMS in those beers. I am confident that the old mantra for brewers to boil their wort 'long and hard' is no longer serving us well. The only reason that a brewer should boil long and hard is if the beer style benefits from it...like a barleywine or old ale. Otherwise, do try this technique.

 

[dinokath]

It turns out that it doesn't take much to get DMS out of wort. A modest, open boil with about a half hour duration is sufficient.

Wow. That's really goes sharply against virtually everything that's out there, but so did Einstein at the time!

I am confident that the old mantra for brewers to boil their wort 'long and hard' is no longer serving us well.

I am going 'long and soft' (LOL) on my boils. I know there are a multitude of factors that go into making beer and without the most meticulous of notes, like any good scientist should make, it's hard to discern what works better than another method. THAT being said, the next time I have a beer on deck that will benefit from a long rest in the bottle, I will give your method there a go and see where it is in a year! Heck, I'll do it on the robust porter I am making this weekend. It won't sit around for a year but I'll adjust my Beersmith recipe to reflect a 30 minute boil. **Head Explodes**

To be perfectly honest, I've never (knock on wood) had and DMS in my beer, even when I was boiling for 'only' 60 minutes. Thanks for the information!

 

[specharka]

I just presented on the subject of wort boiling at the Portland AHA conference and spent over 6 months researching this subject. The short answer is that we homebrewers are still stuck on where the Pro's were 40 years ago. Back then, the state of the art was to boil vigorously. Since then, the Pro's have learned more about what is needed to rid wort of DMS and that there are downsides to exposing the wort to too much thermal stress.

If you brew with the palest malts (aka: Pils), then you first have to worry about converting the DMS precursor (SMM) to DMS. Depending upon the elevation at which you are brewing at, you're probably going to need to spend at least a half hour at your local boiling point but with NO VIGOR. That means that you can just have a minimal simmer and have the kettle completely covered. The SMM to DMS conversion rate is directly proportional to the boiling temperature, so high elevation brewers might have to simmer for longer than a half hour when brewing with high percentage of Pils malt. Because the kettle is covered, the heat input can be turned way down. The lower heating reduces the creation of Thiobarbituric Acid (TBA) which is what has been found to prematurely stale beers.

If you're brewing with slightly darker kilned base malt (2.5L to 4L), then a lot of the SMM has already been converted into DMS during the kilning process and you don't have to worry so much about performing the simmer. However, there is still DMS and that has to be expelled.

It turns out that it doesn't take much to get DMS out of wort. A modest, open boil with about a half hour duration is sufficient. The brewer's elevation doesn't affect the DMS volatilization rate. The most important feature of this stage of the boil is that there is good wort circulation in the kettle and there is good exchange with the atmosphere. Some pro systems don't really boil their wort at this stage. They might use pumped wort recirculation and a spray nozzle to get the wort in more frequent contact with the atmosphere in order to give DMS the chance to exit the wort. The point is that you don't have to have a volcano in your kettle and you don't have to boil for a long time to produce very good DMS reduction.

I've been using this simmer/open boil technique for over a year now and have made several beers with high pils malt content and I and other National and Master judges cannot detect DMS in those beers. I am confident that the old mantra for brewers to boil their wort 'long and hard' is no longer serving us well. The only reason that a brewer should boil long and hard is if the beer style benefits from it...like a barleywine or old ale. Otherwise, do try this technique.

Really informative and helpful post, Martin. Is the creation of TBA also proportional with temperature?

I’ve noticed since moving to a higher altitude (~5300 ft) my resulting beers come out a lot paler than when I lived at sea level. Again, no perceptible DMS in my finished beers and I brew beers primarily using Pilsner malt — the biggest adjustment I’ve had to make is a 28% reduction in hop utilization.

 

[RM-MN]

Wow. That's really goes sharply against virtually everything that's out there, but so did Einstein at the time!



I am going 'long and soft' (LOL) on my boils. I know there are a multitude of factors that go into making beer and without the most meticulous of notes, like any good scientist should make, it's hard to discern what works better than another method. THAT being said, the next time I have a beer on deck that will benefit from a long rest in the bottle, I will give your method there a go and see where it is in a year! Heck, I'll do it on the robust porter I am making this weekend. It won't sit around for a year but I'll adjust my Beersmith recipe to reflect a 30 minute boil. **Head Explodes**

To be perfectly honest, I've never (knock on wood) had and DMS in my beer, even when I was boiling for 'only' 60 minutes. Thanks for the information!

Have you ever considered that your batch size is too small if your beers are all gone before the year is up? Set a 6 pack of bottles aside for the year or more and compare the taste with ones that had had only a month.

 

[dinokath]

Have you ever considered that your batch size is too small if your beers are all gone before the year is up? Set a 6 pack of bottles aside for the year or more and compare the taste with ones that had had only a month.

Ha! Yeah, I primarily keg now and honestly, it just tastes to good most times to let any of it just sit around. The only ones I am really worried about lasting are the ones I intend to have sitting around a long time. I have a Westy clone that's been sitting for 1.5 years now and I pop one of those every now and again and it just gets better and better every time. I used the 'low and long' method on that one.

 

[Smellyglove]

I just presented on the subject of wort boiling at the Portland AHA conference and spent over 6 months researching this subject. The short answer is that we homebrewers are still stuck on where the Pro's were 40 years ago. Back then, the state of the art was to boil vigorously. Since then, the Pro's have learned more about what is needed to rid wort of DMS and that there are downsides to exposing the wort to too much thermal stress.

If you brew with the palest malts (aka: Pils), then you first have to worry about converting the DMS precursor (SMM) to DMS. Depending upon the elevation at which you are brewing at, you're probably going to need to spend at least a half hour at your local boiling point but with NO VIGOR. That means that you can just have a minimal simmer and have the kettle completely covered. The SMM to DMS conversion rate is directly proportional to the boiling temperature, so high elevation brewers might have to simmer for longer than a half hour when brewing with high percentage of Pils malt. Because the kettle is covered, the heat input can be turned way down. The lower heating reduces the creation of Thiobarbituric Acid (TBA) which is what has been found to prematurely stale beers.

If you're brewing with slightly darker kilned base malt (2.5L to 4L), then a lot of the SMM has already been converted into DMS during the kilning process and you don't have to worry so much about performing the simmer. However, there is still DMS and that has to be expelled.

It turns out that it doesn't take much to get DMS out of wort. A modest, open boil with about a half hour duration is sufficient. The brewer's elevation doesn't affect the DMS volatilization rate. The most important feature of this stage of the boil is that there is good wort circulation in the kettle and there is good exchange with the atmosphere. Some pro systems don't really boil their wort at this stage. They might use pumped wort recirculation and a spray nozzle to get the wort in more frequent contact with the atmosphere in order to give DMS the chance to exit the wort. The point is that you don't have to have a volcano in your kettle and you don't have to boil for a long time to produce very good DMS reduction.

I've been using this simmer/open boil technique for over a year now and have made several beers with high pils malt content and I and other National and Master judges cannot detect DMS in those beers. I am confident that the old mantra for brewers to boil their wort 'long and hard' is no longer serving us well. The only reason that a brewer should boil long and hard is if the beer style benefits from it...like a barleywine or old ale. Otherwise, do try this technique.

I've actually managed to get a good amount of dms in both hefes and IPAs brewed on pilsnermalt with 60min boil and a simmer with lid from about 75% to 90% on. It doesn't work in my setup at all. Its been picked up by judges too. Four consecutive batches

But it seems like the dms is creeping after a while in the package.

 

[GPP33]

I have been fighting boilovers with a few brews lately so this whole low boil thing has me intrigued. Now the challenge becomes redetermining my boil off rate. I’ve never detected DMS so what mabraungard posted at least seems plausible from my point of view.

 

[dinokath]

I have been fighting boilovers with a few brews lately so this whole low boil thing has me intrigued. Now the challenge becomes redetermining my boil off rate. I’ve never detected DMS so what mabraungard posted at least seems plausible from my point of view.

For what it is worth, I see a boil off rate with the keggle in my neck of the woods between .75 and 1 gph using the long and slow method I have been using the last year. Here's what I am using as a visual guide - https://obsessedbrewing.com/levels-of-boiling-wort-a-visual-reference-for-homebrewers/ and what I am now doing is somewhere around 3, maybe just a touch lower at times. What I used to do was between 5 and boilover. It was a mess.

I didn't brew this weekend but next weekend we are doing two 5 gallon batches, a kolsch and a cream ale. Both have the potential for strong DMS but more so with the cream ale grain bill I am going to use. We are going to do the 30 minute boil method and see how it goes!

 

[dinokath]

They might use pumped wort recirculation and a spray nozzle to get the wort in more frequent contact with the atmosphere in order to give DMS the chance to exit the wort.

Martin - I have heard that hot side aeration is bad. Wouldn't this be HSA? Since reading on HSA a few years back, I gone through great pains to make sure I don't do it. Now, that being said, I have not noticed, nor has anyone else noticed, and improvement in the finished product since I changed methods to reduce HSA.

There's SO much information out there and SO many differing opinions! I'd love to hear yours on HSA. Thank you!

 

[GPP33]

What is the reason a Barley wine or old ale would benefit from a vigorous boil?

 

[mabrungard]

The element that is missing from the HSA and boil vigor observations above, is the fact that modern kettles employ very secure hatches that prevent any draft or atmospheric contact.

You've probably seen those hatches on new pro kettles...hinged and bolted lids that typically have a clear glass viewing port. It turns out that this is a very important feature. With that hatch, the brewer can monitor the boil vigor AND prevent atmospheric exchange in the kettle. With no draft, the headspace in the kettles becomes essentially oxygen-free since the steam eventually replaces atmospheric gases in there. That aspect needs to be employed for at least the simmer phase of a boil to better control heat loss and added heat stress on the wort.

By opening the hatch on a pro kettle during the late stage of boiling, a good draft can be produced through the headspace and DMS can be expelled from the wort. We homebrewers can do the same by taking the lid off the kettle.

The lid on my kettle is oversized and it doesn't fit tightly. But it leaves me a narrow gap that I can use to see into the kettle with via shining a flashlight in there. I don't believe that much atmospheric air is going to enter the kettle headspace through that opening. But I do find that I must be getting enough exchange when I uncover the kettle for the boil stage.

The other consideration regarding HSA is that the solubility of oxygen in boiling or near boiling wort is virtually zero. That helps avoid the production of HSA related wort damage. It's when your wort is cooler that the potential for HSA damage may exist.

 

[Smellyglove]

Im trying to listen to @mabrungard session on AHA. But the second he takes the stage the audio files goes quiet? Is this classified informaton?

Edit: Bummer! The audio operator forgot to pull up Martins fader, or something, so Martins audio is lost. Damn! I just renewed just because of this even though my bank account said I should wait to next month.

 

[Smellyglove]

I just presented on the subject of wort boiling at the Portland AHA conference and spent over 6 months researching this subject. The short answer is that we homebrewers are still stuck on where the Pro's were 40 years ago. Back then, the state of the art was to boil vigorously. Since then, the Pro's have learned more about what is needed to rid wort of DMS and that there are downsides to exposing the wort to too much thermal stress.

If you brew with the palest malts (aka: Pils), then you first have to worry about converting the DMS precursor (SMM) to DMS. Depending upon the elevation at which you are brewing at, you're probably going to need to spend at least a half hour at your local boiling point but with NO VIGOR. That means that you can just have a minimal simmer and have the kettle completely covered. The SMM to DMS conversion rate is directly proportional to the boiling temperature, so high elevation brewers might have to simmer for longer than a half hour when brewing with high percentage of Pils malt. Because the kettle is covered, the heat input can be turned way down. The lower heating reduces the creation of Thiobarbituric Acid (TBA) which is what has been found to prematurely stale beers.

If you're brewing with slightly darker kilned base malt (2.5L to 4L), then a lot of the SMM has already been converted into DMS during the kilning process and you don't have to worry so much about performing the simmer. However, there is still DMS and that has to be expelled.

It turns out that it doesn't take much to get DMS out of wort. A modest, open boil with about a half hour duration is sufficient. The brewer's elevation doesn't affect the DMS volatilization rate. The most important feature of this stage of the boil is that there is good wort circulation in the kettle and there is good exchange with the atmosphere. Some pro systems don't really boil their wort at this stage. They might use pumped wort recirculation and a spray nozzle to get the wort in more frequent contact with the atmosphere in order to give DMS the chance to exit the wort. The point is that you don't have to have a volcano in your kettle and you don't have to boil for a long time to produce very good DMS reduction.

I've been using this simmer/open boil technique for over a year now and have made several beers with high pils malt content and I and other National and Master judges cannot detect DMS in those beers. I am confident that the old mantra for brewers to boil their wort 'long and hard' is no longer serving us well. The only reason that a brewer should boil long and hard is if the beer style benefits from it...like a barleywine or old ale. Otherwise, do try this technique.

I've mistunderstood you from some while ago and have reread this post a few times now. Will try this tomorrow on my standard "how low can you go DMS"-recipe. Basically, simmer with lid on for 30 minutes (I live about 175m above sea level), then remove lid and turn it up a notch. This will actually be first boil almost ever, with the lid completely off.

 

[Smellyglove]

DMS. Simmer for 30 minutes under the slightly cracked lid to get the intensity correct, then 40 minutes rolling weak boil but with good evaporation.

I have a hefe done the same way, but 40+40min. Have to see how that ends up. But also, I feel all my beers had a better mouthfeel when I did "normal" boils. The shorter and or weaker boils seems to do something with the mouthfeel. It seems overall a bit harsher/thinner. Have to do some more tests.
But, the straight up malt-taste is retained way better.

Do many big breweries boil under pressure? Things go quicker under pressure.

 

[mabrungard]

Do many big breweries boil under pressure? Things go quicker under pressure.

The research that conducted on pro systems suggests that pressurized boiling is less prevalent. However, there are some systems that employ vacuum to encourage volatilization at lower temperature. In any case, it would be a PITA to incorporate pressure or vacuum in our systems.

 

[AkTom]

Jumping in over my head on this thread...
Brundog’s thread “no overhead ventoneeded”, for electric brewers, uses a lid and reduced power has no dms issues.
Not sure if that is any help. If not disregard and brew on.
Cheers

 

[GPP33]

I brewed a Dunkleweizen yesterday and thought it'd be a great one to test out my new low intensity boil. Here are my observations, I'll add more as the beer progresses. Note this was my first time making this recipe so comparisons are not apples to apples.

*I used to just crank it up and let it rip. Sounded like a jet was taking off in my garage and used about as much fuel as a jet flying around the world.

*I turned the burner down as low as I could and still keep a stable flame. I could barely hear it and the propane tank feels as heavy as when I started. I was able to easily keep a nice rolling boil. I did crank it up to get to a boil then backed it off.I also left it uncovered the entire time.

*There wasn't the slightest threat of a boil over. In fact, the boiling wort didn't even get a foam cap once the hot break broke down.

*Despite having a good hot break and the fastest cooling I've ever achieved (I love brewing when there's snow on the ground) the beer running into the fermenter never ran clear. I'll usually get a second or two of cloudy, then crystal clear until I start getting some of the hop matter and hot/cold break flowing in. This beer never turned crystal clear.

*There wasn't much break material left after draining the kettle. I usually brew hoppy beers so I'm sure some of that is due to a single ounce of hops but there still wasn't much there, and it kinda supports my observation that the beer stayed cloudy. Not NEIPA cloudy but just a little.

*My boil off rate was exactly 1/2 of what I normally see, I guess that would be the case and got lucky!

*I achieved a slightly lower efficiency than normal, I'm assuming this is due to 1 gallon less sparge volume. My second batch sparge is usually around 1.015, this one was 1.017. I easily saved enough in propane and enjoyed the reduced noise and added free time of not babysitting for boil overs enough to justify a pinch more grain to account for the lost efficiency.

She's fermenting now.

 

[ncbrewer]

I brewed a Dunkleweizen yesterday and thought it'd be a great one to test out my new low intensity boil.

*Despite having a good hot break and the fastest cooling I've ever achieved (I love brewing when there's snow on the ground) the beer running into the fermenter never ran clear.

Interesting - thanks for posting. I'm anxious to see the final results.

 

[RM-MN]

*Despite having a good hot break and the fastest cooling I've ever achieved (I love brewing when there's snow on the ground) the beer running into the fermenter never ran clear.

Clear beer is what I'm after, not clear wort. They aren't related.

 

[GPP33]

About 72 hours after pitching the Krausen has settled to just a few remaining bubbles, the airlock activity has stopped and the yeast is no longer churning. Krausen only got about 1/2” thick, much shallower than I have ever experienced. Fermentation was slow to start but the starter was also noticeably slow to get going.

I’ll give it a full 2 weeks before messing with it again.

 

[GPP33]

Clear beer is what I'm after, not clear wort. They aren't related.

I hope so. Even though this is a hefe derivative and should be hazy I’d hate to see haze from the boil carry over to the finished product. I should be able to get a good feel of clarity during transfer.

 

[GPP33]

Transferred my Dunkel to a keg today. Nailed my FG and the gravity sample was quite enjoyable.

I want to do the low intensity boil on my IPA tomorrow but I forgot to account for the decreased efficiency when I milled my grains. Gonna need to add a little more base grain in there.

 

[Bassman2003]

I have been trying to learn more about this topic. So are we to take away that huge hot break or a lot of "stuff" left in the boil kettle is actually not desirable? That boiling the snot out of the wort forces some of what we want out of the wort. Crystal clear wort runoff is actually a sign of too much stripped away?

Fascinating to me how so many of us learned the "wrong" way. I always viewed the boil as a big cleanse and almost a reduction from a cooking recipe. This new approach is the exact opposite. Retaining as much as you can while doing the minimum cleanse and evaporation.

Thanks for your input.

 

[GPP33]

I don’t think the idea is to leave more in the beer. My previous observations were based on a sample of one with a recipe I had never brewed before. My IPA that’s chilling now looks normally clear. I guess maybe there is something not getting broken down that makes the beer better, I don’t know, but I do know that I have eliminated boil overs, enjoy a quieter brew day and won’t be getting propane refills nearly as often if this proves to make equivalent beer, better beer would just be a bonus. I’ve now done 2 low intensity boils, haven’t actually had a beer from them yet.

 

[Bassman2003]

I will be starting low intensity boils along with more LODO and spunding with my next three beers. I brewed a hefeweizen with boiling my brew water before, underletting the mash and spunding the keg from the primary. The beer has something special compared to my previous 15 years of brewing hefe. All of the "hype" is worth its salt imho. Will be anxious to brew more and test it out.

 

[GPP33]

One additional plus is that my boil kettle is much easier to clean. Fewer hop particles up on the sides and less precipitate on the bottom.

 

[Hwk-I-St8]

I've been doing low intensity boils from the beginning. I don't have a reason other than it just seemed "easier on the wort" to not pound it into submission. My usual approach is to set the burner on about 75% until it starts to boil, then I keep turning it down until it just barely boils...about a 2 on the boil images posted above and boil with the lid off completely. I have a kettle with a really thick bottom, so it doesn't typically get hot spots.

So far I've had really good results. I've brewed mostly IPAs, pale ales, stouts, porters and blonde ales. The latest is a brut IPA with 100% of the base malt being pilsen. It's really light, crisp and refreshing. I'm not sure about DMS as I don't really have a mental "image" of that flavor.

 

[FleEsq]

This is very interesting. a month ago I had my first brew with a DMS flavor...Tasted like celery. it was a MO smash.
read up on it and all the "experts" stated i needed a vigorous boil for 90 minutes, with the lid off. so that's what i did with a Golden Promise brew this weekend.

I hope I didn't screw up. I am interested to see how it turns out. I'm a little confused as which way to go.

 

[GPP33]

This is very interesting. a month ago I had my first brew with a DMS flavor...Tasted like celery. it was a MO smash.
read up on it and all the "experts" stated i needed a vigorous boil for 90 minutes, with the lid off. so that's what i did with a Golden Promise brew this weekend.

I hope I didn't screw up. I am interested to see how it turns out. I'm a little confused as which way to go.

I’m thinking the problem comes with the interpretation of “vigorous”. I’ve always assumed that meant “balls to wall”. Turns out with my burner as low as I can make it it’s still a really good rolling boil, way more “vigorous” than I’d ever get on a stove top but literally half the boil off rate as full blast.

I doubt you screwed it up, plenty of amazing beers have been brewed with the burner set to Mach 12.

 

[SanPancho]

@mabrungard i cant recall as its been forever, but i thought that kunze showed that the sms was driven off in such a way that it was like a half-life- 30 min drops it by 50%, down to 25% left at an hour, then 12.5% at 90min, etc. is that something you researched?